Radeon PRO W7700 vs HD 8770M

Aggregate performance score

We've compared Radeon HD 8770M with Radeon PRO W7700, including specs and performance data.

HD 8770M
2013
2 GB GDDR5
2.99

PRO W7700 outperforms HD 8770M by a whopping 1567% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

GPU architecture, market segment, value for money and other general parameters compared.

Place in the ranking77061
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data55.87
Power efficiencyno data18.16
ArchitectureGCN 1.0 (2011−2020)RDNA 3.0 (2022−2024)
GPU code nameMarsNavi 32
Market segmentLaptopWorkstation
Release date1 April 2013 (11 years ago)13 November 2023 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$999

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance to price ratio. The higher, the better.

no data

Detailed specifications

General parameters such as number of shaders, GPU core base clock and boost clock speeds, manufacturing process, texturing and calculation speed. Note that power consumption of some graphics cards can well exceed their nominal TDP, especially when overclocked.

Pipelines / CUDA cores3843072
Core clock speed775 MHz1900 MHz
Boost clock speed825 MHz2600 MHz
Number of transistors950 million28,100 million
Manufacturing process technology28 nm5 nm
Power consumption (TDP)no data190 Watt
Texture fill rate19.80499.2
Floating-point processing power0.6336 TFLOPS31.95 TFLOPS
ROPs896
TMUs24192
Ray Tracing Coresno data48

Form factor & compatibility

Information on compatibility with other computer components. Useful when choosing a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. For desktop graphics cards it's interface and bus (motherboard compatibility), additional power connectors (power supply compatibility).

Laptop sizemedium sizedno data
InterfacePCIe 3.0 x8PCIe 4.0 x16
Lengthno data241 mm
Widthno data2-slot
Supplementary power connectorsno data1x 8-pin

VRAM capacity and type

Parameters of VRAM installed: its type, size, bus, clock and resulting bandwidth. Integrated GPUs have no dedicated video RAM and use a shared part of system RAM.

Memory typeGDDR5GDDR6
Maximum RAM amount2 GB16 GB
Memory bus width128 Bit256 Bit
Memory clock speed1125 MHz2250 MHz
Memory bandwidth72 GB/s576.0 GB/s
Shared memory--

Connectivity and outputs

Types and number of video connectors present on the reviewed GPUs. As a rule, data in this section is precise only for desktop reference ones (so-called Founders Edition for NVIDIA chips). OEM manufacturers may change the number and type of output ports, while for notebook cards availability of certain video outputs ports depends on the laptop model rather than on the card itself.

Display ConnectorsNo outputs4x DisplayPort 2.1

API compatibility

List of supported 3D and general-purpose computing APIs, including their specific versions.

DirectX12 (11_1)12 Ultimate (12_2)
Shader Model5.16.7
OpenGL4.64.6
OpenCL1.22.2
Vulkan1.2.1311.3

Gaming performance

Let's see how good the compared graphics cards are for gaming. Particular gaming benchmark results are measured in FPS.

Average FPS across all PC games

Here are the average frames per second in a large set of popular games across different resolutions:

Full HD54
−1474%
850−900
+1474%

Cost per frame, $

1080pno data1.18

FPS performance in popular games

Full HD
Low Preset

Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−1483%
95−100
+1483%

Full HD
Medium Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
−1456%
140−150
+1456%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−1500%
16−18
+1500%
Battlefield 5 5−6
−1500%
80−85
+1500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−1471%
110−120
+1471%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−1483%
95−100
+1483%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−1483%
95−100
+1483%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
−1525%
130−140
+1525%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−1525%
260−270
+1525%
Hitman 3 8−9
−1525%
130−140
+1525%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−1491%
350−400
+1491%
Metro Exodus 3−4
−1400%
45−50
+1400%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−1471%
110−120
+1471%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−1483%
190−200
+1483%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−1438%
600−650
+1438%

Full HD
High Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
−1456%
140−150
+1456%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−1500%
16−18
+1500%
Battlefield 5 5−6
−1500%
80−85
+1500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−1471%
110−120
+1471%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−1483%
95−100
+1483%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−1483%
95−100
+1483%
Far Cry New Dawn 8−9
−1525%
130−140
+1525%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−1525%
260−270
+1525%
Hitman 3 8−9
−1525%
130−140
+1525%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−1491%
350−400
+1491%
Metro Exodus 3−4
−1400%
45−50
+1400%
Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−1471%
110−120
+1471%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−1483%
190−200
+1483%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−1543%
230−240
+1543%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−1438%
600−650
+1438%

Full HD
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 9−10
−1456%
140−150
+1456%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−1500%
16−18
+1500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 7−8
−1471%
110−120
+1471%
Cyberpunk 2077 6−7
−1483%
95−100
+1483%
Far Cry 5 6−7
−1483%
95−100
+1483%
Forza Horizon 4 16−18
−1525%
260−270
+1525%
Hitman 3 8−9
−1525%
130−140
+1525%
Horizon Zero Dawn 21−24
−1491%
350−400
+1491%
Shadow of the Tomb Raider 12−14
−1483%
190−200
+1483%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 14−16
−1543%
230−240
+1543%
Watch Dogs: Legion 35−40
−1438%
600−650
+1438%

Full HD
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 7−8
−1471%
110−120
+1471%

1440p
High Preset

Battlefield 5 5−6
−1500%
80−85
+1500%
Far Cry New Dawn 4−5
−1525%
65−70
+1525%

1440p
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 3−4
−1400%
45−50
+1400%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2−3
−1400%
30−33
+1400%
Cyberpunk 2077 1−2
−1500%
16−18
+1500%
Far Cry 5 3−4
−1400%
45−50
+1400%
Hitman 3 8−9
−1525%
130−140
+1525%
Horizon Zero Dawn 8−9
−1525%
130−140
+1525%
The Witcher 3: Wild Hunt 2−3
−1400%
30−33
+1400%
Watch Dogs: Legion 18−20
−1511%
290−300
+1511%

1440p
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 6−7
−1483%
95−100
+1483%

4K
High Preset

Battlefield 5 1−2
−1500%
16−18
+1500%
Far Cry New Dawn 2−3
−1400%
30−33
+1400%

4K
Ultra Preset

Assassin's Creed Odyssey 2−3
−1400%
30−33
+1400%
Assassin's Creed Valhalla 1−2
−1500%
16−18
+1500%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1−2
−1500%
16−18
+1500%
Far Cry 5 1−2
−1500%
16−18
+1500%
Forza Horizon 4 0−1 0−1
Watch Dogs: Legion 1−2
−1500%
16−18
+1500%

4K
Epic Preset

Red Dead Redemption 2 4−5
−1525%
65−70
+1525%

This is how HD 8770M and PRO W7700 compete in popular games:

  • PRO W7700 is 1474% faster in 1080p

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.99 49.83
Recency 1 April 2013 13 November 2023
Maximum RAM amount 2 GB 16 GB
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm

PRO W7700 has a 1566.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 700% higher maximum VRAM amount, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.

The Radeon PRO W7700 is our recommended choice as it beats the Radeon HD 8770M in performance tests.

Be aware that Radeon HD 8770M is a notebook card while Radeon PRO W7700 is a workstation one.


Should you still have questions concerning choice between the reviewed GPUs, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite graphics card.


AMD Radeon HD 8770M
Radeon HD 8770M
AMD Radeon PRO W7700
Radeon PRO W7700

Comparisons with similar GPUs

We selected several comparisons of graphics cards with performance close to those reviewed, providing you with more options to consider.

Community ratings

Here you can see the user ratings of the compared graphics cards, as well as rate them yourself.


3.3 3 votes

Rate Radeon HD 8770M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.8 4 votes

Rate Radeon PRO W7700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about this comparison, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.